Well its about fucking time. PS3 for $299

[CaptainGeech]

http://gamescom.gamespot.com/story/6215296/299-ps3-slim-unveiled-existing-console-prices-drop-aug-19

Probably going to get one this weekend. It only took 3 years for it to be a reasonable price.

[rockabilly]

W/ only a handful of games i really wanna play on it ... still not interested. I'm happy w/ my X-Box 360 and the games for it.

[CaptainGeech]

Well there is no contest gamewise. Xbox360 is WAY better. I just want to enjoy Bluray without using my computer.

[rockabilly]

That's still PS3's biggest draw is blu-ray. Most of the big games are multi-platform anyway , w/ the development costs as high as they are it's risky to develop for only one console. Having said that however the Wii is bombarded by shovelware.

[TheGuard]

Too little too late as far as I'm concerned. Also, there are only three PS3 exclusives I give a damn about. MGS4, Uncharted, and God of War. Not worth buying a system for at this point.

[rockabilly]

The last guardian looks cool. But Sony did drop the ball big time.

[laoda8]

I have a ps3 and have a handful of games I get in trades, but I feel that I've played most of the good games for the system. Granted I use my 360 for multiplat so it seems as though it has more games, but overall I enjoy the ps3.

I'm playing Metal Gear Solid for the PSOne classics and hopefully they'll have Backwards Compatibility on the newer versions, but until then, oh well.

[ozma]

I would love th 360 if it doesn't crash as much. :x

[rockabilly]

The newer 360's w/ the Jasper chipset should get rid of crashes and RRD problems.

[ozma]

The newer 360's w/ the Jasper chipset should get rid of crashes and RRD problems.

Interesting, wish they put it in with their 1st generation systems. :x

The only games I'm looking forward to playing is of course Medal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy, but since FF is coming to the 360, along with MGS Rising, it's really not worth buying.

[CaptainGeech]

The only problems I have EVER had with my 360 is sometimes it freezes. Its totally my fault when it does though. It only happens when I forget to turn it off overnight and then try to play it without restarting. I think the memory simply runs out. I have never seen the ring of death. It has been a workhorse. Guess I was lucky with the system I got.

[rockabilly]

True ... But God of War 3 and Last Guardian look very good , and Ratchet and Clank , Heavy Rain ... Maybe when it hit's $200 or less i'll get a PS3.

[Silcc69]

The newer 360's w/ the Jasper chipset should get rid of crashes and RRD problems.

Interesting, wish they put it in with their 1st generation systems. :x

The only games I'm looking forward to playing is of course Medal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy, but since FF is coming to the 360, along with MGS Rising, it's really not worth buying.

They wanted to beat Sony out the gate so quality w/o the window.

[rameses2]

For 300.00, the PS3 should get a bigger following now. EA reported, last month, that their games sell better on the PS3 than any other system, in America!?! And the new PS3 Slim, 120gb hard drive, also $300, but sadly, no backwards compatibility :cry: .

[BLKGSXR]

dude sony did this due to deficiency of sales
Either dont sell consoles or sell them and take a fractional loss for it..
its been a subject since last November.

[BellaBellucci]

True ... But God of War 3 and Last Guardian look very good , and Ratchet and Clank , Heavy Rain ... Maybe when it hit's $200 or less i'll get a PS3.

Co-sign.

~BB~

[Ryz]

W/ only a handful of games i really wanna play on it ... still not interested. I'm happy w/ my X-Box 360 and the games for it.
lol what are you playing? Games that came out last year? :)

[rockabilly]

Going through Prototype now. And Point Lookout dlc for Fallout 3. How bout you Ryz whats spinning in your consoe? My point is what games are ONLY for PS3 ... it's a small list.

[CaptainGeech]

Well I would love to play the following:

Metal Gear Solid 4
inFamous
Killzone 2
LittleBigPlanet
Resistance 2
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune

Although before that I think I might get Call of Duty 4 for Xbox360. Its on sale for 36.99. Been wanting that for a long time. I heard its fucking amazing.

[alpha2117]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

[CaptainGeech]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.

[Ryz]

Going through Prototype now. And Point Lookout dlc for Fallout 3. How bout you Ryz whats spinning in your consoe? My point is what games are ONLY for PS3 ... it's a small list.
Ugh, I hated Prototype. Right now I just got DLC for Wipeout and Burnout so I'm playing those right now and I just bought Fat Princess

[BLKGSXR]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.on point-bulk=cheaper But to be honest Sony is taking a major hit on this so called price drop :roll:
Reviewers first quoted a PS3 to be priced for 800-now down to 300...sales arent as high as they used to be...Economic downfall!

[rockabilly]

Yeah Prototype did not live up to the hype. Batman - Arkham Asylum is next for me.

But in all honesty i still play Bioshock everyday , and play KOTOR some weekends. A good game is good no matter how old it is. And Bioshock is still an amazing experience.

[Silcc69]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.

You also have to take in part R&D, marketing, shipping and etc. I've read up on these things and the only company that has never sold a console at a loss in Nintendo. It sometimes can take years for these parts to drop in prices. And remember alot of these components aren't off the shelf parts either.

[CaptainGeech]

I hate timeouts :evil:

[CaptainGeech]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.

You also have to take in part R&D, marketing, shipping and etc. I've read up on these things and the only company that has never sold a console at a loss in Nintendo. It sometimes can take years for these parts to drop in prices. And remember alot of these components aren't off the shelf parts either.

True. I did forget about some of those other factors. But they are making it sound much worse than it really is.

$600 was too much for the 3DO
$600 was too much for the Atari Jaguar
$600 was too much for the Neo Geo
$600 was too much for the PS3
Sony is lucky they didn't die immediately.

Sony really disappointed me this time. The PS2 is one of my favorite consoles of all time. But they really screwed the pooch on this generation. First it was the insane price. Then no real exclusives. Then motion control instead of dualshock because they didn't want to pay licensing fees. And so on and so on...

[Silcc69]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.

You also have to take in part R&D, marketing, shipping and etc. I've read up on these things and the only company that has never sold a console at a loss in Nintendo. It sometimes can take years for these parts to drop in prices. And remember alot of these components aren't off the shelf parts either.

True. I did forget about some of those other factors. But they are making it sound much worse than it really is.

$600 was too much for the 3DO
$600 was too much for the Atari Jaguar
$600 was too much for the Neo Geo
$600 was too much for the PS3
Sony is lucky they didn't die immediately.

Sony really disappointed me this time. The PS2 is one of my favorite consoles of all time. But they really screwed the pooch on this generation. First it was the insane price. Then no real exclusives. Then motion control instead of dualshock because they didn't want to pay licensing fees. And so on and so on...

The 3DO hardware was leaps and bounds better than what was in the 16-Bit machines plus it uses a double speed CD-ROM drive

The Jaguar was never 600 dollars it was always 249.99

The Neo-Geo was basically an arcade unit

The PS3 when it first came out was like the cheapest and best BR player out there back in 06.

[CaptainGeech]

It should be noted that both Sony and Microsoft sell those consoles at a loss already. It's hard to be to critical of them.

Actually before the new "slim" version even came out I read that Sony recently started to make around $70 each console sold.

I have a really hard time believing they were losing money on each console soon after launch. Yes. If you or me were to buy those components and add up the cost it would cost more than what they were selling the system for. But Sony doesn't pay that same amount. They buy in bulk. A hard drive that costs you or me $100 costs them $45. Why? Because they buy 100,000 at a time. Same for the other components. Them claiming they were losing money is total BS. Maybe for the first couple months but after that no.

You also have to take in part R&D, marketing, shipping and etc. I've read up on these things and the only company that has never sold a console at a loss in Nintendo. It sometimes can take years for these parts to drop in prices. And remember alot of these components aren't off the shelf parts either.

True. I did forget about some of those other factors. But they are making it sound much worse than it really is.

$600 was too much for the 3DO
$600 was too much for the Atari Jaguar
$600 was too much for the Neo Geo
$600 was too much for the PS3
Sony is lucky they didn't die immediately.

Sony really disappointed me this time. The PS2 is one of my favorite consoles of all time. But they really screwed the pooch on this generation. First it was the insane price. Then no real exclusives. Then motion control instead of dualshock because they didn't want to pay licensing fees. And so on and so on...

The 3DO hardware was leaps and bounds better than what was in the 16-Bit machines plus it uses a double speed CD-ROM drive

The Jaguar was never 600 dollars it was always 249.99

The Neo-Geo was basically an arcade unit

The PS3 when it first came out was like the cheapest and best BR player out there back in 06.

True. I guess what I was trying to show with those examples was that there seems to be a limit to what mainstream gamers are willing to pay. Sometimes those systems are cutting edge. Sometimes they are way ahead of there time. But ultimately fail because of that high price. Are you sure about the Jaguar? I could have sworn that it was at least $399 for awhile. And I thought it was even more when it first launched.

[Silcc69]

Jag was major cheap. Most of those other system they probably didn't want to sell them at a loss. And the NG was so popular in the arcade parlors that they could get away with it as a niche system and even being so damn high it is the second longest living console outside of the 2600. As for the PS3 Sony had a massive fanbase that they thought would follow them in droves for the PS3. Hey we charged 299.99 for both the PSX and PS2 let's go for 599 and 499 for the PS3 and boy were they in for a ride awakening.

[CaptainGeech]

We better start saving for the next generation of systems in 2012. They will probably be $800-$1000

[AmericanDream]

Don't waste your money on that junk, you can get a blu-ray player for $200. The XBOX360 Elite just dropped it's price to $300 also.

[BLKGSXR]

Don't waste your money on that junk, you can get a blu-ray player for $200. The XBOX360 Elite just dropped it's price to $300 also.PS3's have blu ray players built in

[Trowa]

I'm a Sony fanboy so my opinion might be a bit biased but.

XBox 360 is a piece of shit. If you don't own either console, PS3 hands down is the way to go. Theres no point in getting an Xbox unless you play FPS, the system has nothing else going for it besides a 54% failure rate.

[CaptainGeech]

I'm a Sony fanboy so my opinion might be a bit biased but.

XBox 360 is a piece of shit. If you don't own either console, PS3 hands down is the way to go. Theres no point in getting an Xbox unless you play FPS, the system has nothing else going for it besides a 54% failure rate.

Except for Xbox Live, Netflix, and superior versions of cross platform games. But other than that they are crap. :roll:

I am not giving Microsoft a free pass either. That failure rate is astonishing. And it is truly deplorable that they didn't even fully acknowledge the problem until millions of users were adversely affected. Being one of the lucky ones I find it difficult to fully hold that against them.

This whole console generation has been pretty disappointing to me. Like you pointed out. Xbox360's quality is spotty and they are dying all the time. PS3 was overpriced and didn't have enough good games. Nintendo threw in the towel and focused solely on niche games for the general public and delivered a system about as powerful as a toaster oven. etc....

[rockabilly]

The only thing i'm missing out on by not having a PS3 is the first party software. And i mostly got the Wii because of Zelda and Mario games , i've been playing the new Punch Out as well ... does anybody know how to knock King Hippos crown off ? :shrug:

[Ryz]

I'm a Sony fanboy so my opinion might be a bit biased but.

XBox 360 is a piece of shit. If you don't own either console, PS3 hands down is the way to go. Theres no point in getting an Xbox unless you play FPS, the system has nothing else going for it besides a 54% failure rate.

Except for Xbox Live, Netflix, and superior versions of cross platform games. But other than that they are crap. :roll:

I am not giving Microsoft a free pass either. That failure rate is astonishing. And it is truly deplorable that they didn't even fully acknowledge the problem until millions of users were adversely affected. Being one of the lucky ones I find it difficult to fully hold that against them.

This whole console generation has been pretty disappointing to me. Like you pointed out. Xbox360's quality is spotty and they are dying all the time. PS3 was overpriced and didn't have enough good games. Nintendo threw in the towel and focused solely on niche games for the general public and delivered a system about as powerful as a toaster oven. etc....

PS3 has a movie store, 360's Netflix has no Sony/paramount movies and you can stream Netflix on your PS3. You also own the movies once you buy em, off the movie store that you can also watch on your PSP.

Superior versions of cross platform games? Heh. COD4, Burnout Paradise, COD Waw, Arkham Asylum, GTA4 Dead Space, and more all look better on PS3.

[rockabilly]

I'm a gamer , simple as that. Each console has it's own pros and cons ... but this generation is the only time i have never had all 3 at launch. I got my 360 and Wii on launch day , the price and small supply of PS3's kept me from buying it at launch. If they can work out a simple way to transfer all my games and movies then the PSP go will be my next purchase.

[Legend]

PS3 has a movie store, 360's Netflix has no Sony/paramount movies and you can stream Netflix on your PS3. You also own the movies once you buy em, off the movie store that you can also watch on your PSP.

Superior versions of cross platform games? Heh. COD4, Burnout Paradise, COD Waw, Arkham Asylum, GTA4 Dead Space, and more all look better on PS3.

You probably have to buy those movies at an individual price in the psn store, netflix is only 10 bucks for unlimited views for any move you can instantly watch, one movie on the psn store is probably 10 bucks.

Come on "superior versions" thats bs, that batman came isn't the superior version it just has a extra level because sony paid for it, thats like saying the xbox 360 version of gta 4 is superior because microsoft paid for extra content,when everyone knows its the same game.

[Ryz]

GTA4 is better to get on Xbox though :(

[Ziggy33]

I've got them both....games look better on my 360!

[CaptainGeech]

I'm a Sony fanboy so my opinion might be a bit biased but.

XBox 360 is a piece of shit. If you don't own either console, PS3 hands down is the way to go. Theres no point in getting an Xbox unless you play FPS, the system has nothing else going for it besides a 54% failure rate.

Except for Xbox Live, Netflix, and superior versions of cross platform games. But other than that they are crap. :roll:

I am not giving Microsoft a free pass either. That failure rate is astonishing. And it is truly deplorable that they didn't even fully acknowledge the problem until millions of users were adversely affected. Being one of the lucky ones I find it difficult to fully hold that against them.

This whole console generation has been pretty disappointing to me. Like you pointed out. Xbox360's quality is spotty and they are dying all the time. PS3 was overpriced and didn't have enough good games. Nintendo threw in the towel and focused solely on niche games for the general public and delivered a system about as powerful as a toaster oven. etc....

PS3 has a movie store, 360's Netflix has no Sony/paramount movies and you can stream Netflix on your PS3. You also own the movies once you buy em, off the movie store that you can also watch on your PSP.

Superior versions of cross platform games? Heh. COD4, Burnout Paradise, COD Waw, Arkham Asylum, GTA4 Dead Space, and more all look better on PS3.

Yeah. Like Legend said Netflix streaming is free with the basic subscription. You are also the first person I have ever heard saying the PS3 versions are better looking. Almost every review I have ever read has said the XBOX360 looks better and has a superior frame rate. Gamespot even had a article showing this. True, these are mostly first generation PS3 games but I have heard the same generalization ever since.

http://www.gamespot.com/features/6162742/index.html

[Trowa]

I believe I read that GTAIV and DMC4 not only looked better on PS3 but ran better as well. The reason so many 360 versions are "superior" is because most of the time developers choose to start production on the 360 because it's easier to decode and the PS3 version is a port. Games like Tekken 6 and FFXIII started development on the PS3 and the 360 versions will be ports, we'll have to wait and see what kind of shortcomings there are in the Xbox versions.

[BLKGSXR]

Cheaper console to buy is the PS3 currently-Comes Blu-Ray and Wifi. No extra equipment needed
The Wifi Adapter for the 360 is like 50 bucks cheap yes but not something id waste money on. ^_^ to be honest there is alot of shit Sony does better than Microsoft and vice versa....when it comes down to it. Sony ftw. just never buy their car electronics lol.

[rockabilly]

Not quite on topic but what do you think of the "Board" that you use in the new Tony Hawk game ?

[southern81]

only one reason 2 but a P3 and its METAL GEAR other than that i'm staying w/ 360

[Legend]

Not quite on topic but what do you think of the "Board" that you use in the new Tony Hawk game ?

A worthless peripheral that was inspired by the lastest "casual" gaming trend and the fact that the game was getting its ass kicked by the skate franchise was probably inspiration for them trying something else to.Why anyone would buy this instead of a real skate board is beyond me.

[rockabilly]

True ... I hope there is an option to use classic controls , i liked Tony Hawk because of it's crazy combos and it's pick-up and play style. Some kid is gonna kick flip that "board" into his t.v. and sue over it. SMH

[CaptainGeech]

Haven't purchased a Tony Hawk game since Pro Skater 3 on PS2. The board seems really gimmicky to me. Like some fat kids parents invented it to try and keep little Johnny safe.

[rockabilly]

We have guitar and drum controllers , light guns have been around forever and now a skate board controller. I'm all for innovation in how we play games , but games are an escape from reality.

[runamok]

only one reason 2 but a P3 and its METAL GEAR other than that i'm staying w/ 360

God of War 3 looks to be ZOMG amazing! But the lack of good FPS and shooting games made me hold back on the PS3. I think the slim model will be a xmas gift from the SO. Hopefully, Sony releases some good AAA from now till then. Not wanting to put BC made me pause with the PS3 as well.

[celticgrafix]

ps3 sucks
only good things is its got bluray

[Ryz]

only one reason 2 but a P3 and its METAL GEAR other than that i'm staying w/ 360

God of War 3 looks to be ZOMG amazing! But the lack of good FPS and shooting games made me hold back on the PS3. I think the slim model will be a xmas gift from the SO. Hopefully, Sony releases some good AAA from now till then. Not wanting to put BC made me pause with the PS3 as well.
It basically has everything the 360 has except Halo. But there is also Time Crisis 4 KillZone2 and Resistance 1 and 2

[rockabilly]

Splinter Cell - Conviction ... still a 360 exclusive. And looking great .

[Ryz]

That's not a FPS and it's also for PC :)

[rockabilly]

Yeah but it looks sweet ... big twist ... Sam's daughter is not dead ! She's black ops and .... ugh CRACK ( neck snapped by agent ... re spawn in 5min )

[Ryz]

Yeah, it looks pretty fun still. Maybe it won't stay as an exclusive. I hope

[rockabilly]

Aghhh WTF just happened ?! I was about to reveal that the female agent they showed pics of a long time ago ... is Sams daughter. Or that was the plan ... idk if they will still go w/ that or not.

[celticgrafix]

shitttt, i wonder what that playstation magazine picked in the console faceoff

[CaptainGeech]

The only good exclusive for Xbox 360 is Halo 3? Really?

Gears of War, Gears of War 2, Forza Motorsport 2, Perfect Dark Zero, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Project Gotham Racing 3, Dead or Alive 4, Left 4 Dead, Fable, Fable II, Mass Effect, Ace Combat 6, Dead Rising, Saints Row, Ninja Gaiden II, etc...

Not all amazing games and some are really old but still solid titles.

And when/if Alan Wake is FINALLY released it will be exclusive. I know that when A game is delayed as much as Alan Wake has it usually ends up being total shit. But I cant help having high hopes since I absolutely loved Max Payne.

[Ryz]

The only good exclusive for Xbox 360 is Halo 3? Really?

Gears of War, Gears of War 2, Forza Motorsport 2, Perfect Dark Zero, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Project Gotham Racing 3, Dead or Alive 4, Left 4 Dead, Fable, Fable II, Mass Effect, Ace Combat 6, Dead Rising, Saints Row, Ninja Gaiden II, etc...

Not all amazing games and some are really old but still solid titles.

And when/if Alan Wake is FINALLY released it will be exclusive. I know that when A game is delayed as much as Alan Wake has it usually ends up being total shit. But I cant help having high hopes since I absolutely loved Max Payne.
Only good FPS!. I wasn't talking about all the exclusives, and because some games aren't on the PS3 doesn't mean its an exclusive :P

[rockabilly]

Bioshock is my fave shooter on 360. It does so much perfectly ... it's like a work of art.

[CaptainGeech]

The only good exclusive for Xbox 360 is Halo 3? Really?

Gears of War, Gears of War 2, Forza Motorsport 2, Perfect Dark Zero, Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, Project Gotham Racing 3, Dead or Alive 4, Left 4 Dead, Fable, Fable II, Mass Effect, Ace Combat 6, Dead Rising, Saints Row, Ninja Gaiden II, etc...

Not all amazing games and some are really old but still solid titles.

And when/if Alan Wake is FINALLY released it will be exclusive. I know that when A game is delayed as much as Alan Wake has it usually ends up being total shit. But I cant help having high hopes since I absolutely loved Max Payne.
Only good FPS!. I wasn't talking about all the exclusives, and because some games aren't on the PS3 doesn't mean its an exclusive :P

lol. True. But for the sake of this argument (exclusivity) I didn't worry about the PC or PS2. As for the Wii. I don't consider a Gamecube with motion control to be relevant. As for the games. Not all of them are FPS. Although I will admit that's the biggest strength of the 360.

A non FPS game I would like to see on the xbox 360 is a new Psychonauts. The original tanked in sales so I doubt that will happen but a guy can dream. Loved that game on the original xbox. Its a shame that an awesome and incredibly creative game like that can bomb and a piece of shit like Spider-Man 3 or The Godfather II can sell millions.

[rockabilly]

Psychonauts was amazing , Brutal Legend should be cool. I hope it sells better ... another good original X-Box game is Jade Empire , i hope it gets a sequel.

[Sulka_bewitched_me]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

[CaptainGeech]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

Cant say I agree. At $499 and $599 it wasn't worth it and indeed a total rip off. Instead of focusing on developing great games they were focusing on using the cell processors to cure diseases and trying to convince us that rumble support wasn't important. They finally have a decent lineup. They offer a great Bluray player. They increased the hard drive space and have Built-in Wi-Fi. At $299 it's finally worth the money in my opinion. I just wish it was backwards compatible. Its a shame they didn't offer that to there customers.

[Sulka_bewitched_me]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

Cant say I agree. At $499 and $599 it wasn't worth it and indeed a total rip off. Instead of focusing on developing great games they were focusing on using the cell processors to cure diseases and trying to convince us that rumble support wasn't important. They finally have a decent lineup. They offer a great Bluray player. They increased the hard drive space and have Built-in Wi-Fi. At $299 it's finally worth the money in my opinion. I just wish it was backwards compatible. Its a shame they didn't offer that to there customers. How long has it been/taken for it to become what it currently is? I just feel sorry for those poor saps who actually paid $499-$599 for it in the first place. The fact it isn't backwards compatible is a slap in the face to the current owners.

[CaptainGeech]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

Cant say I agree. At $499 and $599 it wasn't worth it and indeed a total rip off. Instead of focusing on developing great games they were focusing on using the cell processors to cure diseases and trying to convince us that rumble support wasn't important. They finally have a decent lineup. They offer a great Bluray player. They increased the hard drive space and have Built-in Wi-Fi. At $299 it's finally worth the money in my opinion. I just wish it was backwards compatible. Its a shame they didn't offer that to there customers. How long has it been/taken for it to become what it currently is? I just feel sorry for those poor saps who actually paid $499-$599 for it in the first place. The fact it isn't backwards compatible is a slap in the face to the current owners.

Agree with everything here. Its a shame it took them soooo fucking long to figure things out. I really hope whoever orchestrated the launch and was responsible for the following 3+ years of bad decisions was fired. Backwards compatibility really comes down to money. If people could play those games on the system Sony couldn't charge $10-20 for the downloadable "classics" version. But since I don't have a bluray player (other than my PC) and they have some games I would love to play (MGS4, Killzone, LittleBigPlanet, etc...) I am finally tempted to buy a PS3 at the $299 price point. Especially since its going to be another 3+ years for the next Gen systems to come out.

[dj4monie]

Sony was going to die over the PS3? Hardly! People complained about the original PS2 being $299 when was released.

I didn't complain I waited, I knew the price would drop. The Slim PS2 came out, with the original price drop of $199, then I waited....

It went down to $179 just before the release of GT4 and I picked up both.

When the PS3 was announced and the first few games were going to be FPS' I knew I could wait again. I have NO interest in such games, I'll leave personal feelings about the decay of Society to another thread.

Games like Metal Gear Solid came out, fine but I haven't played MGS2 or 3 yet. It can wait.

I was mildly interested in GRID when it came out (I like racing game can you tell?) but it was available on PC as well, so I decided, I only needed a $70 video card to play GRID at playable speed (30+fps) with max settings, so I went that route.

Ferrari Challenge came out, but online was only supported on PS3, still not worth it to buy the console, I waited.

When rumors of a Slim PS3 started to surface I knew two things would happen -

Prices of current stock and new units would fall. I knew prices of Refurbished PS3's Phats would go down.

Guess what -

PS3 Slim - $299 (available for pre-order)
PS3 80GB - $299 (remaining stock)
PS3 20GB Refurbished - $279

Slim doesn't have a card reader and only 2 USB ports and its main flaw compared to the original - Its not Backward Compatible!

So I'll take my chances and pick up a PS3 20GB, its just cheaper and I can put my PS2 back in its box or in my car.

I still play PS2 games and why not? Its not all about graphical power and with a deep library of games available at rock bottom prices its a great time to own a PS2.

The only mistake Sony made was releasing such a console when the economy was on the brink to start with. They also rode the crest of the PS2 a bit too long.

The PS3 release and struggle in the market reminds me of the struggle Nintendo had vs the Sega Genesis when the Super Nintendo was first released.

I bet on that console and who won that battle?

The PS2 survived not only the original Xbox, but two Nintendo consoles (Gamecube and N64) and the Sega Dreamcast.

Nintendo's early fears of piracy are largely unfounded. So while Sony forged ahead with CD-ROM based game storage, Nintendo nearly lost by sticking with expensive cartridges too long.

Sega made tactical errors in marketing, along with betting 2D games would still be dominate the market, WRONG.

It took Sony this long to get the price of production down to a point where they could reduce the price, simple as that. That's also why they deleted the card reader, backward compatibility, extra USB ports and ability to install Linux. Since such a small community of users also got any mileage out of those things.

This is the time to buy a PS3, because its best series of games to hit the console are about to be released including GT5. While early titles are now Greatest Hits and can be purchased for a 40% reduction in price from the original.

In Electronics there are early adopters and value minded shoppers. Early Adopters pay the higher cost and get the least amount of value. While those who wait, get better value for the money and more mature hardware (less issues).

I'm currently paying the price for being one of the first people to have a Android powered cellphone. While it came out almost two years after the Iphone, there is only ONE Iphone but there's about to be 3-4 additional phones powered by Android. Androids user base will exceed Apples within a few years.

I was never interested in either of Microsoft's consoles, they don't offer any real advantage over Sony's consoles. Xbox games looked better, but that's because it was newer hardware then the PS2 but still never managed to catch the PS2 in overall sales which stands at 140 million consoles world wide and counting.

The controller of the Xbox was by biggest problem with the console, seeing that Microsoft made it some 40% smaller with the Xbox 360, Umm I think they proved my point.

MS has only a few exclusives and frankly as I said, if you like FPS then the 360 is your console. PS3's game library it tiny and not fleshed out yet, its early days for the PS3 and its best games haven't been released yet, usually around the 3rd year of its life cycle which is 2009...

[Silcc69]

Sony was going to die over the PS3? Hardly! People complained about the original PS2 being $299 when was released.


Nobody complained about the price of the PS2 which was the same price as the PSx. Even with the Dreamcast (RIP) at 149.99 the PS2 still moved at a record pace. Sony became the first console to dominate 2 generations in a row (handheld units being the only exception.) now Sony got way to cocky thinking that the same people would cough up 499 and 599 in droves while the 360 costed 299-399 and the Wii costed 249.

[dj4monie]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

Cant say I agree. At $499 and $599 it wasn't worth it and indeed a total rip off. Instead of focusing on developing great games they were focusing on using the cell processors to cure diseases and trying to convince us that rumble support wasn't important. They finally have a decent lineup. They offer a great Bluray player. They increased the hard drive space and have Built-in Wi-Fi. At $299 it's finally worth the money in my opinion. I just wish it was backwards compatible. Its a shame they didn't offer that to there customers. How long has it been/taken for it to become what it currently is? I just feel sorry for those poor saps who actually paid $499-$599 for it in the first place. The fact it isn't backwards compatible is a slap in the face to the current owners.

It was worth the money if you wanted the most advance console on the market and was willing to wait for the software to take full advantage of it.

If you bet on the games for the console 2 or 3 years after its release it would be worthy of the hardware, then you bet correctly those are current 20GB and 60GB owners. Late comers bought the 40, 80 and 160GB models.

Now that its $299, I believe its a complete slap in fact to turn its back on PS2 owners. But I think Sony believes the people that were holding out for a price drop own a PS2 and don't want to part with it.

I am just running out of room and electrical plugs... I have a PSOne, the Original Playstation (Sept '95), Dreamcast (when it was discontinued, it was cheaper than ever) and I will be adding a PS3 here pretty soon. I am going with a refurbished model that has BC in it so like I said I can put my Slim PS2 away and use about the same amount of space...

[dj4monie]

Sony PS3 is/will be a dead format. It's sales figures speak volumes. Blu ray sure but an awfully expensive blu ray at that. Software libraries are the key driver of console sales, and no console is going to sell on promises - they've got to deliver. Sony needs more must-have first party titles to sell consoles and quite frankly they don't. I had a friend at work purchase a PS3 but I didn't have the heart to tell him he made the wrong choice and wasted his money.

Cant say I agree. At $499 and $599 it wasn't worth it and indeed a total rip off. Instead of focusing on developing great games they were focusing on using the cell processors to cure diseases and trying to convince us that rumble support wasn't important. They finally have a decent lineup. They offer a great Bluray player. They increased the hard drive space and have Built-in Wi-Fi. At $299 it's finally worth the money in my opinion. I just wish it was backwards compatible. Its a shame they didn't offer that to there customers. How long has it been/taken for it to become what it currently is? I just feel sorry for those poor saps who actually paid $499-$599 for it in the first place. The fact it isn't backwards compatible is a slap in the face to the current owners.

It was worth the money if you wanted the most advance console on the market and was willing to wait for the software to take full advantage of it.

If you bet on the games for the console 2 or 3 years after its release it would be worthy of the hardware, then you bet correctly those are current 20GB and 60GB owners. Late comers bought the 40, 80 and 160GB models.

Now that its $299, I believe its a complete slap in fact to turn its back on PS2 owners. But I think Sony believes the people that were holding out for a price drop own a PS2 and don't want to part with it.

I am just running out of room and electrical plugs... I have a PSOne, the Original Playstation (Sept '95), Dreamcast (when it was discontinued, it was cheaper than ever) and I will be adding a PS3 here pretty soon. I am going with a refurbished model that has BC in it so like I said I can put my Slim PS2 away and use about the same amount of space...

[dj4monie]

Sony was going to die over the PS3? Hardly! People complained about the original PS2 being $299 when was released.


Nobody complained about the price of the PS2 which was the same price as the PSx. Even with the Dreamcast (RIP) at 149.99 the PS2 still moved at a record pace. Sony became the first console to dominate 2 generations in a row (handheld units being the only exception.) now Sony got way to cocky thinking that the same people would cough up 499 and 599 in droves while the 360 costed 299-399 and the Wii costed 249.

Actually it was their mistake not to have a popular title ready to go on the system when it launched. What they bet on what capitalizing on the First Person Shooter trend on PC's. Look at the first couple of titles out on the PS3.

Blazing Angels: Squadrons of WWII
Call of Duty 3
Def Jam: Icon
Enchanted Arms
FIFA 07
Fight Night Round 3
Formula One Championship Edition
Full Auto 2: Battlelines
Genji: Days of the Blade
The Godfather: The Don's Edition
Marvel: Ultimate Alliance
Mobile Suit Gundam: Crossfire
MotorStorm
NBA 2K7
NHL 2K7
NBA Street: Homecourt
Resistance: Fall of Man
Ridge Racer 7
Sonic the Hedgehog
Tiger Woods PGA Tour 07
Tony Hawk’s Project 8
Untold Legends: Dark Kingdom
Virtua Fighter 5
Virtua Tennis 3
World Snooker Championship 2007
F.E.A.R.
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six: Vegas
Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Double Agent
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

I put the FPS in bold and a trend on PC's not consoles, the user base on PC's is much larger. Not all of the 24 millions users love First Persona Shooters

The rest of the launch titles are a series of hack and slash games, niche sports titles and low volume sales games.

People weren't looking to play Ridge Racer 7 or Need For Speed, what they wanted was Gran Turismo!

What people wanted wasn't a dying gender - The Platformer (Sonic The Hedge Hog), they wanted Metal Gear Solid!

They didn't care if GTA4 was exclusive they just wanted the game, why did it matter which console it came out on first? It mattered to Microsoft and they overpaid for that right to have it first on their console.

Some Blockbuster titles would have allowed Sony to take the lead and keep it. They are in a different market than the Wii, I don't even count the Wii as competition when they are still releasing Mario based games...

Nintendo can't even come out with a competitor to Sony's top titles and their multi-platform titles always pale in comparison

Nintendo knew they couldn't compete toe to toe with the hardcore gamer market, they focused on the casual gamer and that's where they are succeeding.

The launch titles Sony came up with don't sell consoles... When the original PS1 came out, I pre-ordered it because I knew we were going into uncharted territory in video games, 3D was largely the domain of expensive 486 PC's and those who could afford Voodoo add-on cards.

That fact that the games were 3D were enough for many people to buy the console. When games like GT and MGS came out or even NFL Gameday that caused people enough excitement to buy the console.

When the PS2 came out they had Madden 2000 READY and MGS was only a few months away. They showed a teaser at the second E3 I was at, the first year in Los Angeles.

You need software to go with your hardware. If you have Game Changing Hardware like Sony did, you need popular games to show off the Hardware's power. First Person Shooters are far too niche to have wide success with them.

It was a marketing blunder!

They have time to make up for that though and you'll see this Christmas.

[CaptainGeech]

In the end I think it comes down to the exclusive games. All you really need is one UNBELIEVABLE game to sell a new system. This happened with Halo and the original Xbox. It also happened with me on the Nintendo 64 and Mario 64. I remember seeing that game in the local Target on display and having my jaw hit the floor. I didn't care if that system had any other games. I didn't care how much it cost. I needed that thing and I was going to make my parents life a living hell until they bought it for me.